Montgomery Child Care Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520880656
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rockville, MD, USA
Phone
3019847680
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,761,813
Expenses
$8,019,946
Assets
$9,377,098
Liabilities
$1,298,690

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE RILEY (PRESIDENT)
  • EMILY GAGLIARDI (VICE PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)
  • MICHELLE MARTINEAU GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHELLE MARTINEAU GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $262,448 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL CARELLI (CONTROLLER): $177,117 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE BELSKI (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $168,896 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Montgomery child care association strives to provide the highest quality child care and play-based education for children in montgomery county, Maryland; professional training for child care providers; advocacy for affordable, quality child care for families of all income levels, and for better training, pay and benefits for child care professionals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Instruction: the association provides high quality child care and early education for approximately 600 infant to school age children at 10 centers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.5%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.9% of revenue deployed · 75.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $262K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $196K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.